Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

AFGHANISTAN: Ouster of Contractors Throws U.S. Strategy in Doubt

If private security contractors are phased out in Afghanistan, as Afghan President Hamid Karzai has demanded, it could have a profound impact on U.S. military strategy there.

Print Friendly

Inter Press Service

Charging that U.S. private security contractors are "mafia-like groups" being financed by U.S. taxpayers to carry out "terrorist activities" with the support of the U.S. government, Afghan President Hamid Karzai has ordered a four- month phaseout of all private security companies in his embattled country.

Asserting his oft-challenged authority as the country's chief executive, Karzai's move, if implemented, would likely change the security landscape in Afghanistan. Critics are saying it would be likely to result in potential delays of many foreign projects and undermine the strategy being followed by top U.S. commanded in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus.

Economic organisations such as the World Bank, and compounds of embassies, consulates, nongovernmental organisations, would be exempted from the rule.

But it appears clear that Karzai's hostility toward U.S. contractors is fuelled by their impact on domestic Afghan politics. Attacks by U.S. drones and other forces have resulted in the killing of innocent Afghanistan civilians.

This has not only turned into hostility by Afghans toward U.S. and allied troops, but it puts at peril the strategy announced by the new U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus. That strategy depends on the military courting Afghan civilians by protecting them from the Taliban and improving the government services they receive.

In a related development, Xe Services, the private military company formerly known as Blackwater Worldwide, has agreed with the U.S. State Department to pay 42 million dollars in fines for hundreds of violations of United States export control regulations, after allegedly illegally sending weapons to Afghanistan and training international civilians to be soldiers.

The latter charge includes making unauthorised proposals to train troops in south Sudan and providing sniper training for Taiwanese police officers.

The company is said to be pleased with the settlement, which will allow it to continue to get government contracts.

However, the settlement does not resolve other legal issues the company is facing. Five former Blackwater executives are under indictment executives on weapons and obstruction charges.

In a related development, the Iraqi government said it plans to seize weapons from foreign security firms and expel ex- Blackwater contractors still in the country, according to Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani.

The decision was triggered by the Iraqi government's outrage over the dismissal by a U.S. court of charges against Blackwater Worldwide guards who were accused of killing 14 Iraqi civilians in Baghdad in 2007. The guards said they shot in self-defense.

The judge said there was evidence of prosecutorial misconduct. The U.S. government is appealing the dismissal of the court case. The Iraqi government, which has prohibited Blackwater from operating in Iraq, has hired U.S. lawyers to prepare a lawsuit against the company.

For many Iraqis, the killing of the 14 civilians became emblematic of the impunity from prosecution in Iraq enjoyed by foreign security contractors after the 2003 U.S. invasion. That immunity ended last year under a U.S.-Iraqi security agreement transferring sovereignty back to Iraq.

Karzai took the challenge to U.S. and NATO influence over his much-criticized government to the American airways over the weekend. During an appearance on ABC's "This Week," he pressed for the removal of the vast majority of U.S. private contractors by the end of this year. He said their continued presence inside Afghanistan was "an obstruction and impediment" to the country's growth, a waste of money, and a trigger for corruption among Afghan officials.

He added, "One of the reasons that I want them disbanded and removed by four months from now is exactly because their presence is preventing the growth and development of the Afghan security forces – especially the police force – because if 40, 50,000 people are given more salaries than the Afghan police, why would an Afghan … man come to the police if he can get a job in a security firm, have a lot of leeway without any discipline? So naturally our security forces will find it difficult to grow. In order for our security forces to grow these groups must be disbanded."

Karzai's proposal drew cautious support from Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who was on a two-day visit to Afghanistan. Kerry said a reorganization of the country's security was called for.

"It is in (President Karzai's) interest to build his own security capacity as fast as possible," Kerry said, adding that it was also in the U.S.'s interest. However, he said, the timetable would need to be worked out.

But, according to U.S. officials, Afghanistan's army and police are not yet ready to take up the roles now played by private security contractors. If anything, the corruption that Karzai sees in the contractor corps could get worse if the Afghan army – itself a reported haven for corruption – is now asked to take on an even larger role.

Yet Karzai said, "I'm appealing to the U.S. taxpayer not to allow their hard earned money to be wasted on groups that are not only providing lots of inconvenience to the Afghan people but are actually, god knows, in contract with mafia- like groups and perhaps also funding militants, and insurgents and terrorists with those funds."

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Rep. Illeana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), former chair of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, is a leading ”pro-Israel” hawk in Congress.


Brigette Gabriel, an anti-Islamic author and activist, is the founder of the right-wing group ACT! for America.


The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of the more effective U.S. lobbying outfits, aims to ensure that the United States backs Israel regardless of the policies Israel pursues.


Frank Gaffney, director of the hardline neoconservative Center for Security Policy, is a longtime advocate of aggressive U.S. foreign policies, bloated military budgets, and confrontation with the Islamic world.


Shmuley Boteach is a “celebrity rabbi” known for his controversial “pro-Israel” advocacy.


United against Nuclear Iran is a pressure group that attacks companies doing business in Iran and disseminates alarmist reports about the country’s nuclear program.


Huntsman, the millionaire scion of the Huntsman chemical empire, is a former Utah governor who served as President Obama’s first ambassador to China and was a candidate for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

AIPAC has done more than just tolerate the U.S. tilt toward extreme and often xenophobic views. Newly released tax filings show that the country’s biggest pro-Israel group financially contributed to the Center for Security Policy, the think-tank that played a pivotal role in engineering the Trump administration’s efforts to impose a ban on Muslim immigration.


Print Friendly

It would have been hard for Trump to find someone with more extreme positions than David Friedman for U.S. ambassador to Israel.


Print Friendly

Just as the “bogeyman” of the Mexican rapist and drug dealer is used to justify the Wall and mass immigration detention, the specter of Muslim terrorists is being used to validate gutting the refugee program and limiting admission from North Africa, and Southwest and South Asia.


Print Friendly

Although the mainstream media narrative about Trump’s Russia ties has been fairly linear, in reality the situation appears to be anything but.


Print Friendly

Reagan’s military buildup had little justification, though the military was rebuilding after the Vietnam disaster. Today, there is almost no case at all for a defense budget increase as big as the $54 billion that the Trump administration wants.


Print Friendly

The very idea of any U.S. president putting his personal financial interests ahead of the U.S. national interest is sufficient reason for the public to be outraged. That such a conflict of interest may affect real U.S. foreign policy decisions is an outrage.


Print Friendly

The new US administration is continuing a state of war that has existed for 16 years.


RightWeb
share